1)

(a)Our Mishnah rules that if three women are sleeping in one bed, if blood is found underneath ...

1. ... the middle one - then all three are Tamei.

2. ... the innermost one - then she and the middle one are both Tamei (but not the outermost woman).

3. ... the outermost one - then she and the middle one are both Tamei but not the innermost woman).

(b)This last ruling will only apply however - there where the innermost woman alighted from the bed at its foot (avoiding the location of the Kesem), but if she crossed over to the other side of the bed to alight, then she too is Tamei.

(c)In a case where one of the three women examines herself and finds that she is ...

1. ... Tamei, the Tana rules that - the other two are Tahor.

2. ... Tahor - then she is Tahor, and the other two, Tamei.

(d)And in a case where two of the three women examine themselves and discover that they are ...

1. ... Tamei - then the third woman is Tahor.

2. ... Tahor - then she (the third woman) is Tamei.

2)

(a)Rebbi Meir also rules that, in a case where they all examined themselves and discovered that they are all Tahor - we declare them all Tamei ...

(b)... since the blood must have come from one of them.

(c)Comparing this to three piles of rubble, one of which contains a k'Zayis of Meis, Rebbi Meir rules in a case where they searched all three but failed to find the piece of Meis that - they are all Tamei.

(d)Rebbi Meir bases his ruling there on the principle that - Whatever has a Chezkas Tum'ah remains Tamei until one discovers where the Tum'ah is.

3)

(a)In the latter case - the Chachamim obligate a search up to the nearest rock or virgin soil, after which all three piles are Tahor.

(b)To resolve the discrepancy between our Mishnah and the previous one, which declared all three women Tamei, irrespective, Rebbi Ami establishes the latter - where the three women were sleeping intertwined.

(c)When Rebbi Meir compares the case of the three women to that of the three piles - he means to ask the Chachamim on what grounds they differentiate between them.

(d)They ...

1. ... dispute his opinion there - because they assume that a bird came and removed the k'Zayis Meis.

2. ... agree with him in the case of the three women - because the Kesem must have come from one of them, as we explained.

4)

(a)Rebbi Meir, in a Beraisa brings a proof for his opinion from a case of a sycamore tree which had a Chezkas Tum'ah, but they were unable to trace the Tamei object. In the end, a wind blew down the tree and they discovered a skull stuck to one of its roots.

(b)The Rabbanan countered his proof however - by pointing out that they had not searched properly to begin with.

(c)They gave the same explanation in another case cited by Rebbi Yossi, where, after they failed to find the Tum'ah in a cave of trenches which had a Chezkas Tum'ah, and which they declared Tahor after reaching ground that was as smooth as a human nail - workers once entered the cave to shelter from the rain, and they chipped away with their axes, revealing a large cavity full of bones.

5)

(a)Aba Shaul tells of the area of the Rock of Beis Choron (which had a Chezkas Tum'ah, but which was too large an area to search conventionally). A certain Zakein - examined it - by spreading wet sheets across the entire area. The Tamei area, where the earth was soft, became wet (because it absorbed the water), whereas the Tahor areas remained dry (see also Tosfos DH 'Makom Taharah Lach').

(b)The name of the Zakein was - Rebbi Yehoshua ben Chananyah.

(c)The bones that they found there in the pit that they subsequently discovered - were those of the people whom Yishmael ben Nesanyah had murdered (many years earlier, after the first Churban) ...

(d)... and the reason that the Pasuk in Yirmiyah ascribes the murder to Gedalyah ben Achikam is - because he chose to ignore the warning that Yochanan ben Kere'ach issued him, for which the Pasuk considers him as if he had actually perpetrated the murder.

(e)Rava learns from there that - even though one is forbidden to accept Lashon ha'Ra, one is nevertheless obligated to suspect it, in the event that the warning is life-threatening.

6)

(a)Rebbi Tarfon was in a dilemma what to do when some men from the Galil asked him to hide them. According to rumor, they had murdered somebody).

(b)He did not want to ...

1. ... refuse their request - because then they would be caught (and there was no proof that they were guilty).

2. ... accede to it either - because he was obligated to suspect that the rumor was true, and it was forbidden to save them (see Tosfos ha'Rosh).

(c)So he advised them - to save themselves.

7)

(a)The Pasuk in Chukas quotes Hash-m's instructions to Moshe, not to be afraid of Og Melech ha'Bashan. The name of Og's brother was - Sichon.

(b)They were both sons of Achyah - son of Shamchaza'i (one of the two angels who were sent down to earth before the era of the Great Flood).

(c)Rebbi Yochanan Amar Rebbi Shimon ben Yochai explains that Moshe was afraid of Og but not of Sichon - because he had been instrumental in saving Lot (by informing Avraham that he had been captured by the four kings [notwithstanding his evil motives ... that Avraham should attack the kings and get himself killed so that he could marry Sarah]).

(d)The Pasuk in Lech-L'cha relates "Vayavo ha'Palit Vayaged le'Avram ha'Ivri" - a reference to Og, who escaped from the battle of the kings.

8)

(a)In a case where a Kesem gets lost in a garment - (either by being soaked in water or rolled in the blood of an animal), the Tana Kama of the Beraisa prescribes - rubbing the garment with seven ingredients (as listed in the next Mishnah) ...

(b)... in order to negate the Kesem.

(c)This Beraisa is inserted here - because it is similar to the piles in which Tum'ah has been lost (which we discussed earlier).

(d)Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar prescribes - examining it 'Shechunos Shechunos', which the Beraisa defines as - three Etzba'os at a time, until one finds it.

9)

(a)If Shichvas-Zera is lost in ...

1. ... a new garment - one runs a needle across it (knowing that it will get caught in the area containing the Zera, which is thick).

2. ... an old garment - one holds it up to the sunlight, which will be blocked by the area containing the Zera.

(b)One cannot examine a new garment in the sunlight - because the entire garment is too thick to allow any sunlight through.

10)

(a)We learned in a Beraisa that selling a garment in which Sha'atnez has been lost to a Nochri is prohibited - because we are afraid that he will sell it to a Yisrael, who has no way of knowing that it contains Sha'atnez.

(b)The Tana also forbids making from such a garment - a saddle-cloth for one's donkey.

(c)On the other hand - he permits using it as shrouds for a Meis.

(d)In the latter case, we ask why we are not afraid that the Meis will contravene the Din of Kil'ayim when he arises at Techi'as ha'Meisim. Rav Yosef solves it however - by extrapolating from this Beraisa that Mitzvos will become nullified in the time of Techi'as ha'Meisim (see Tosfos DH 'Amar Rav Yosef').

11)

(a)Abaye (or Rav Dimi) queries Rav Yosef from a statement by Rebbi Mani Amar Rebbi Yanai, who qualifies the Beraisa's statement under discussion - by allowing (not burying the dead in this garment, but) - eulogizing him in it.

(b)We reject this Kashya however, from Rebbi Yochanan - who specifically permits burying him in it, based on the Pasuk in Tehilim "be'Meisim Chofshi" (meaning that once a person dies, and is Patur from the Mitzvos, he will remain Patur forever).

(c)And he learns it from there - based on Chazal, who say that, at Techi'as ha'Meisim, everyone will arise dressed in the clothes in which they were buried.

12)

(a)Rafram bar Papa cites Rav Chisda, who permits a garment containing Kil'ayim that is lost, if one first dyes it - because when wool and linen are mixed together, the dye does not catch on, and if it did, it must be because the lost threads must have fallen out).

(b)When Rava asked him from where Rav Chisda learned it, he cited our Mishnah 'Bodek ad she'Magi'a le'Sela', from which he extrapolated that - if they did not find the Tum'ah up to that stage, one can assume that a bird removed it (as we explained earlier). Likewise here.

13)

(a)Rav Acha b'rei de'Rav Yeiva citing Mar Zutra permits a woolen garment containing a linen thread, which the owner pulled loose but is not sure whether it came out completely - because, as we are about to see, Kil'ayim that is not completely joined (as is the case here), is only Asur mi'de'Rabbanan, and the Rabbanan only decreed when it is definitely joined (see Seifer 'Eizehu Mekoman'.

(b)This ruling is based on the acronym of Sha'atnez, 'Shu'a, Tavuy ve'Nuz'. Shu'a means that the two threads have been combed together ...

1. ... Tavuy that - they have been spun together and ...

2. ... Nuz that - they have been woven together (see also Tosfos DH 'Shu'a, Tavuy ve'Nuz').

(c)We refute Rav Ashi's contention that any one of Shu'a, Tavuy and Nuz should be Asur d'Oraysa (and it is only where all three are absent that the Torah permits) - since the fact that the Torah presents all three in one word intimates that all three are required.

14)

(a)According to the Tana Kama in a Beraisa, a colored garment is subject to the Din of Kesem - Rebbi Nasan bar Yosef holds that it is not.

(b)The initial text 'she'Lo Tiknu Bigdei Tziv'onin le'Ishah Ela Lehakel al Kismeihen' - is incorrect, inasmuch as there was no Takanah made to wear colored clothes.

(c)We therefore amend it to - 'she'Lo Hutru Bigdei Tziv'onin le'Ishah Ela Lehakel ... '.

(d)The problem with the amended text is that - it implies that the Chachamim initially forbade colored clothes (which they later permitted), whereas no such Isur ever existed.

15)

(a)We answer that Chazal did indeed attempt to forbid a woman to wear colored clothes - to minimize excessive pleasures in such troubled times.

(b)They decided not to however - in order to circumvent Tum'as Kesamim.

(c)They did however, forbid playing an Eirus (a sort of tambourine or a timpani [a type of drum]) - and wearing the crown worn by Chasanim (see also Mishnah in Sotah, 49a).

(d)All this took place - during the siege of Vespasian (a short time before the destruction of the second Beis-Hamikdash).